The Portland daily press., 1887-07-21
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT.


LAW TBRM-wRsTERN DISTRICT.
WEDNESDAY following cases were dis
posed Of today:
FRANKLIN COUNTY.
Nathan r. Backus and others, appellants from
decree Of Judge Of Probate, approving the will of
Sarah L. Stanley, appellant from the decree of
Judge Of Probate, appointing, oren D. Cheney as
In the Supreme Court, sitting at Farminofon
Bates College as legatee under the will and Mr.
Cheney as executor named therein, moved 10
nave Doth appeals transferred to the docket OF
the supreme Court in some other county under
chap. 81, see. IA, OF the Revised Statutes which
motions were resisted by the appellants upon the
ground that this statute does not apply TO probate
appeals. The presiding justice ruled that he had
no authority TO grant the notions and the only
question IN these appeals is as to the correctness
The words Of the original act, Of which the
statute Is a revision, are: ut shall be the duty of
any judge OF the Supreme Judicial Court for This
State, while holding any Fisi pri,.s term If said
court for the trial OF civil criminal cases. TO or
der for good and sufficient reasons shown, on mo
ton or actions, or criminal case now pending or
hereafter to be brought in said court 10 the dock
Ct OF SAID court in any other county in this State
The counsel for the appellants. Mr.. S. C. strout,
contends that the term civil action" does not in,
ciude Inc probate OF a will, which Is more nearly
q proceeding In rem TO determine the status OF
the deceased and the validity OF the will that as
a probate court can never be held In any other
tU.
proceedings must be there until the final settle.
mont of the estate.
Judge symonds, on the part Of the executor,
claims that the statute was intended to authorize
cnange OF venue in any civil or criminal pro-
ceedlng, whenever, In the judgment of the court
there was good cause for making such change II
Is entitled IAN act TO provide for The renewal az
the venue OF civil and criminal cases, in certain
contingencies,n clearly and in the broadcast terms
covering the wnole held OF legal procedure. The
text OF the original act refers 70 civil or criminal
causes, ana subsequently uses the words "ciyil
The same sen.n ns or criminal ease" In precisely
and criminal cases. are used in the tifle of the
act 30 Tar as there is any change In the revision
II Is merely change of form without change Of
meaning. saying the same thing Ia a briefer way
~ i as Important to parties, said Judge Symonds.
10 nave lalr trial Of a probate appeal as of any
case penulng IN court, and IL is as much their
right TO claim that such an appeal should be sub
mitted only to an impartial tribunal II il is to be
jury TRIAL With 'fs ali the sh Incidents se any DS
tights ,l E which 60 along with, it. The power of
me, Court uneoubtedly + ample in probate ap-
action on the part of the jury and to deprive Il of
an injurious result. But this Is no reason why the
under consideration, should deprive Itself Of the
first Instance
ANDRoscoGGIN COUNTY.
Charles II. Gerrick VS.. C. P. Stone Exceptions
Lewiston Steam Mill Company VS.. Isaac Bow
man. Neither party.
..,i .oo y. houudlu vs.. Alvin RECORD. Argued
orally Dy aeiendants counsel and e. Knapp.
Lnclus Packard ct ais, appellants from decision
OF County Commissioners
Maine Benefit Association VS.. George Hamilton.
Submitted on BRIEFS
Samuel *. Littlehale VS.. Stephen p. Littlefield
Savage. a. "
Manufacturers National Bank VS.. Frank A.
Conant. To be argued in writing
EIed King vs. Stephen Hayes. To be argued in
Jesse M. Libby VS.. Ellen +. Mayberry To be
oyerruled. P''o"'
Catherine d. Fitch, executor, VS., Lewiston
steam MIL Company Submitted on briefs
Robert Tilson, appellant VS. William nj Small.
Submitted on BRIEFS ~
state VS.. Charles Carville. appellant Submitted,